UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA AT MONROE

Call #: 02005-SPCH 260: 02 SMALL GROUP COMMUNICATION

Instructor: Dr. Carl L. Thameling

(Tentative)

Office: Stubbs Hall 120

Office Phone: 342-3184

Office Hrs: MTW 1:30-4:00 p.m.; TH 9:30-10:30 a.m.; F 10-11:00 a.m.

E-mail:

Class Meets: MW, 11:00 a.m. to 12:15 p.m.

Textbook: Rothwell, J.D. (2007). In mixed company: Communicating in Small Groups and

Teams, (6th ed.) Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Additional Readings: Additional Readings will be kept to a minimum.

Course description: This course will introduce you to small group processes, such as, conformity, norm development, leadership emergence, social influence, conflict emergence and resolution, consensus, effective verbal and nonverbal communication, role development, policy-making and other concepts critical to small group formation, maintenance, and communication. In this course you will participate in two policy-making groups and one panel discussion. This involvement will offer you the intimate experience needed to increase your understanding of group processes and increase your ability to participate more effectively and ethically in group discussions and decision-making sessions.

Course objectives: In this course you will learn how small group communication differs from other communication contexts. In addition, you will acquire an appreciation and understanding of the role small groups assume in making a contribution to society. Your knowledge of the processes unique to the small group setting will increase as this course progresses and eventually ends. You should leave this class with a clear understanding of the tools and strategies needed to succeed in some small group environments. While your skill base will be enhanced, increasing your understanding and appreciation of the theoretical underpinnings supporting small group communication will be a primary focus of this course. Knowing the theory and research findings will aid you in making more effective choices/decisions when participating in small group settings in the future. Finally, a major goal of this course is to prepare you, the major or non-major, for more advanced study in the field of communication.

Assignments: There are six graded sections of the course:

1. Exam 1...... Mon., Jan., 29...... 20%

2. Exam 2...... Mon.,Feb., 26...... 20%

3. Exam 3...... Fri., May 11...... 20%

4. Critique ...... Wed., Apr. 18 or Wed., May2...... 05%

5. Discussion #1...... Wed., Feb. 28-Wed., Mar. 7...……………………………………..10%

6. Discussion #2...... Mon., Mar.19-Wed., Apr. 4…...pilot/trial run...... 05%

7. Discussion #3...... Mon., Apr. 16-Wed., May 2…..…...... 20%

1

Policies: There are seven major requirements to maintain enrollment in this course, and they are:

1. Attendance. Attendance is absolutely required any day your group is having a graded

discussion. Any student who misses a discussion may expect SEVERE PENALTIES to be leveled against his or her grade.

2. Attendance. Required attendance will be affected during each round of discussions. For instance, you will be required to attend all panel discussion sessions. However,

attendance during the policy-making discussions will be limited to three discussions (yours and two others) per round of the policy-making discussions. However, you still must not miss a whole week of classes, nor more than four classes.

3. Attendance. You will not pass this class with four accumulated absences. If your class meets once a week, missing one class is equivalent to one week of classes and two absences.

4. Attendance. Attendance must meet ULM’s attendance policy. Read page 9 of the ULM Student Policy Manual (SPM) 2006-07 for class attendance regulations.

5. Assignments. To receive a passing grade in this class all assignments must be completed.

6. Conduct. Class disruptions are arriving late, cell phones, and conversations that interfere with

another group’s discussion content (including text messaging and completing homework in class from another course). See ULM SPM, 2006-07, pp. 9-10.

7. Accommodations. Students needing special support must provide documentation to the

Counseling Center (342-5220) before requesting support with course

Requirements (see ULM SPM, 2006-07, pp. 19-20).

Weekly Schedule

Spring2007

(Tentative)

Week One Introduction to the course, including purposes, activities,readings, and

1/16-1/19 evaluation procedures. Conduct a "get acquainted" activity in class.

Read Rothwell Chapters 1&2

Week Two Discuss the nature of group communication, how it differs from

1/22-1/26 communication in other settings in which groups are often encountered Advantages and disadvantages of working together in groups, with a particular emphasis on decision making. Discuss the importance of nonverbal communication.

Week Three Test 1, Read Rothwell Chapter 3.

1/29-2/2Discuss Intrapersonal Dynamics of groups. Form discussion groups.Makeassignment #1: Show a video-tape of a panel discussion.

Week Four Read Rothwell, Chapter 4, and Hirokawa and Pace article.

2/5-2/9 Prepare for effective discussion participation, selecting topics, formulating question and developing an agenda. Discuss collecting information, types of evidence, and tests for evidence.

Week Five Read Rothwell, Chapters 5 & 6

2/12-2/16 Discuss reasoning soundly: The use of inference and inferential error. In addition, discuss the place of syllogisms and enthymeme in groups. Discuss group roles & leadership.

Week Six Mardi Gras Holiday, Feb. 19, 20, & 21. No classes.

2/19-2/23 For week 9 readRothwell, Chapters 7, 8 & 9.

Week Seven Test 2, Discussion Round One: Panel Discussion

2/26-3/2

Week Eight Panel Discussion (continued). Make Assignment #2:Policy-making groups.

3/5-3/9 Re-organize into new groups.Explain written critique. Record midterms

Week Nine Discuss norms, social norms, social influence, group pressure, cohesion,

3/12-3/16 conformity, status, and power Make assignment #3: Show a Video-tape

or audio-tape of a sample group discussion

Week Ten Read Rothwell, Chapter 10, continue discussing power and conflict.

3/19-3/23 Discussion Round Two: Policy-Making groups.

Friday, March 23 is the last date to drop courses or resign

Week Eleven Discussion Round Two: Policy-Making groups (continued)

3/26 -3/30

Week Twelve Discussion Round Two: Policy-Making groups (continued)

4/2 -4/6

Week Thirteen Spring Holiday, April 6-13th.

4/9-4/13

Week Fourteen Discussion Round Three: Policy-Making groups.

4/16-4/20 Discussion Critique Due

Week Fifteen Discussion Round Three: Policy-Making groups (continued)

4/23-4/27

Week Sixteen Discussion Round Three: Policy-Making (continued)

4/30-5/4 Review & Final Week.

Final Exam

The final exam will be cover in-class lectures, Chapters 8, 9, and 10, and other reading materials for the course. It will be given during the examination period scheduled for Friday, May.11, 2007, 8:00-9:50 a.m., STBS,247.

Instructions for Panel Discussion: Assignment #1

Small Group Communication

forms of public discussion

The forms available for public discussion are nearly unlimited, but most fall into one of four patterns: panel, symposium, lecture forum, and buzz session. You may already have participated in the lecture forum, if you have never given a speech followed by a question period.

PANEL

The panel is a guided conversation held in the presence of an audience. The speakers, usually three to six in number, possess special information or points of view on a particular topic or problem. Under the direction of a leader, they engage in conversation among themselves, but expressly for the benefit of the audience. Indeed, during most panel discussions, the audience is ultimately invited to ask questions or make comments. In a brief talk the leader outlines the procedure and introduces the topic and panelists. Since panel members usually hold a special point of view, they may be asked for short opening statements. The dangers, however, may offset the advantages by turning the panel into a symposium, thereby destroying the spontaneity and conversational informality.

OBJECTIVE OF PANELS

Panels give an audience the specialists’ insights and possibly encourage a future course(s) of action, as panelists are rarely able to struggle through to a particular solution. They are usually content with creating “audience concern” and clarifying some potential answers. An incidental but important by-product of the panel discussion is its ability to help some people realize that well-informed experts who hold widely divergent points of view can disagree sharply and still maintain respect for each other.

When you serve as moderator or leader, you bear a heavy burden for the panel’s success. You need not be an “authority” on the subject, but your duties will include:

  1. Creating a friendly, informal atmosphere conducive to a lively, good-natured discussion.
  2. Clarifying procedures for the panelists and audience.
  3. Tactfully guiding the discussion toward previously established goals.
  4. Phrasing questions designed to probe and draw out discussion of unexamined areas.
  5. Keeping panelists aware of the audience.
  6. Sensing the opportune time to open the discussion to the audience. Your introduction should set the rules for audience participation, but throughout you may offer spaced suggestions, for example, “In a few moments a member of our audience may want to comment or question us about the statistics we’ve just presented.” No sharp break in the discussion need occur to permit audience participation.
  7. Recognizing yourself as a prober, organizer, mediator-not as a chief contributor, authority, or source of all wisdom. The discussion should move easily and freely among panelists with no necessity for formal recognition of each individual. If you as a leader must speak after each contribution, the discussion may bog down and lose its lively give-and-take spontaneity.

When you are a panelist, you share with the other members the major responsibility for the substance and content of the discussion. The leader’s burden is considerably lightened if all panelists carry out their roles. Responsibilities include:

  1. Preparation and research no less thorough than is required of the public speaker. In some respects, if you perform well, you face a more demanding task; you are required to shift, adapt, and integrate your ideas with those of four or five other persons. Careful listening in imperative.
  2. Understanding the dramatic elements in the panel discussion. Too many panels become oppressively dull because members seem unaware of the audience and underplaying is far greater than any tendency to “ham it up.”
  3. Suppressing your desire to give a “speech” or present your “facts” simply because you have them.
  4. Recognizing the need for excellent delivery.
  5. Tact, a sense of humor, and a willingness to engage in a controversial discussion without losing your good nature. Try to disagree, when necessary, without being disagreeable.

AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION: THE FORUM

If the panel is successful, audience participation interlaces or follows the panelists’ opening portion. No formal break need occur. The moment for audience questions is usually determined by the moderator’s awareness of someone’s desire to speak. The moderator continues to direct and coordinate the discussion, recognizing speakers from the audience and encouraging as many different persons as possible to speak. As leader, you may have to rule tactfully on the relevance of questions, reward them, if necessary, and sometimes direct them unobtrusively to specific panel members. As time (typically about one hour) runs out, you need to adjourn the session by thanking the panel and summarizing the positions impartially and briefly.

Small Group Communication

PANEL DISCUSSION*

Here is a sample of an outline suitable for a 30-minute panel discussion:

[Intro.: 1 min.] Purpose: To obtain audience involvement and participation in an important problem.

Question: What policy should the United States follow to halt the spread of communism in Central America?

[Definition: 2 min.] 1. What terms need to be defined?

  1. What do we mean by communism?
  2. What do we mean by Central America?

[5 min.] 2. How widespread is communism in Central America?

[3 min.] 3. Is it likely to spread further?

[5 min.] 4. Why is communism gaining influence in Central America?

[12 min.] 5. What might our government do to stop the spread of communism in Central America?

[Conclusion: 3 min.]

* Source: Bormann, E.G. (1990), Small Group Communication: Theory & Practice,Harper & Row.

1

1

Small Group Communication

PANEL DISCUSSION GRADING SHEET

Participant’s Name: ______

(Individual factors 1-6)

1. Appropriate use of evidence
  1. Quality of evidence
  2. Well reasoned ideas
  3. Clear and appropriate language
  4. Clear and distinct voice
  5. Spontaneity of presentation
  6. Response to audience (Group factors 7-14)
  7. Adaptation to audience
  8. Clarity of purpose
  9. Clarity of major ideas
  10. Relationship of major ideas to purpose
  11. Well developed subordinate ideas
  12. Involved audience
  13. Balanced member participation
/ 0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4

Add the scores for each item and divide by 14 to yield a number between 0 and 4.

Comments:

Instructions for Policy-Making Discussion: Assignments#2 & #3

Small Group Communication

Choose a university, national (within the U.S.) or international (between countries) topic that all members of your group are interested in, and then phrase an actuative question on that topic. A question of policy, or an actuative question, entails choosing a course of action. Sometimes the options are predetermined or otherwise restricted as in the case of the question, "Should the term of office of the president of the United States be extended to six years?" More often than not, however, the members of a policy group must generate alternative courses of action and then consider their merits in relation to carefully selected criteria and decision rules. In either case, the objective is to determine which of the courses of action the group is considering will best reduce some apparent difficulty or bring about a desired state of affairs.

1

In dealing with questions of policy, it may become necessary to answer other kinds of questions (declarative and evaluative) prior to making a final choice. A common mistake is to assume preference is the only basis for choice: that is, if a majority of the members think that one alternative is better than the others, then that is the best choice. Because policy questions are frequently complicated by the need to dispose of numerous subordinate issues, you will have to draw on a considerable fund of knowledge and make a careful analysis of what your information shows in order to have much assurance of making the most defensible choice.

The other important fact to remember is that you need to consider the full range of alternatives. When a decision-making group prematurely limits its options, it almost automatically increases the likelihood that the best possible choice will not be among them.

SampleQuestions:

1. What should be the university's policy concerning academic dishonesty?

2. What should the university do about crime on campus?

3. How should the U.S. protect rainforests in other countries?

4. What should be the U.S.’s policy concerning nuclear disarmament?

5. How should corporations handle rumor over expansion? Downsizing? etc.

Use your first work session to select a topic, phrase a question, appoint a chairperson if necessary, exchange names and phone numbers, decide limitations, if any, you wish to impose on the question, and begin to develop a tentative agenda. Between work sessions, you should proceed independently to work on the question and to try to familiarize yourself with as much relevant information as possible in the time you have available. The final work session can be used to determine if there are last -minute problems which the group as some whole needs to work out prior to its discussion and to set the final version of the agenda.

If the work sessions are to be of any value, you have to assume responsibility for initiating ideas. Therefore, try to come prepared for each session and do whatever necessary to facilitate the group's task.

Even though some people feel that a preliminary run-through is helpful, the discussion itself should be a spontaneous event. That is, participants should react to one another's contributions as they arise. What any member says at a given point is partially determined by what has preceded and what is called for in terms of the group's agenda. A decision-making discussion, in other words, is not a rehearsed performance. To be meaningful, interaction cannot and should not be planned.

The previous remarks do not imply decision making discussions are unstructured. On the contrary, a group should have a general outline or agenda on which the substance of its discussion focuses, but an agenda is not a script. Think of yourself as being part of jury, or other such fact-finding group. Such groups examine information and try to reach a conclusion about what is true or likely. They do not engage in rehearsed performances.

small group communication

Grading Instrument for Policy-making discussions

PARTICIPANT: ______

SECTION: ROUND: ______

PARTICIPANT RATING SCALE*

1. Participant's contributions were goal oriented. (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

2. Participant initiated discussion on relevant issues. (Weight 2.0) 1 2 3 4 5

3. Participant amplified contributions. (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

4. Participant was a consistently active contributor. (Weight 0.5) 1 2 3 4 5

5. Participant introduced information from qualified sources to confirm, disconfirm, or otherwise explore the developmental content of assertions. (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

6. Participant critically examined the bases for positions expressed. (Weight 1.5) 1 2 3 4 5

Weighted average:______

Procedure: Each item is multiplied by its weight. The sum is then divided by 7. This operation produces a score between1.0 and 5.0.

Definitions of numerical ratings: (1) Poor (2) below average (3) average (4) above average (5) excellent

* Adapted from Gouran, 1982, 1990

GROUP RATING SCALE

1. Agenda (written correctly and followed). (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

2. Discussion question (specific, obtainable, and correct). (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

3. Evidence (quality and quantity). (Weight 2.0) 1 2 3 4 5

4. Spontaneity (natural and unplanned). (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5 .

5. 0rganization. (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

6. Well prepared and informed. (Weight 2.0) 1 2 3 4 5

7. Cooperative and considerate. (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

8. Motivation (involved others). (Weight 0.5) 1 2 3 4 5

9. Nonverbal communication. (Weight 0.5) 1 2 3 4 5

10. Reasoning (logical and analyzed). (Weight 1.0) 1 2 3 4 5

Weighted Average: ______Group Grade: ______Recorded Grade: ______

Procedure: Each group item is multiplied by its weight. The sum is then divided by 11. This produces a score between 1.0 and 5.

Scale: (A) 4.6- 5.0 (B) 3.6-4.5 (C) 2.6- 3.5 (D) 1.6-2.5 (F) 1.0-1.5

1